VS2005 SP1, are they kidding?
-
DotNetInterest wrote:
Does that mean we cannot build .NET 1.1 apps in Vista. It has to be only 2.0 applications, since there is no way to build 1.1 apps with VS.NET 2005.
"We’re also testing to ensure that your .NET Framework 1.1 and 2.0 applications will work on Windows Vista so that your existing applications will continue to run as expected." That means you can use any Visual Studio version to build for Vista but not on Vista. But then again the VB6 IDE and runtime is fully supported: http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbrun/vistasupport.aspx[^] Seems like they have nothing they can sell to the VB6 people which wouldn't require a rewrite, so they support VB6. All VS6, 2002 and 2003 users can just buy a new Studio.
ABuenger wrote:
All VS6, 2002 and 2003 users can just buy a new Studio.
Where did it say that VS6 would no longer build on Vista? :confused:
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] Nobody likes jerks. [espeir] The zen of the soapbox is hard to attain...[Jörgen Sigvardsson] I wish I could remember what it was like to only have a short term memory.[David Kentley]
-
ABuenger wrote:
All VS6, 2002 and 2003 users can just buy a new Studio.
Where did it say that VS6 would no longer build on Vista? :confused:
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] Nobody likes jerks. [espeir] The zen of the soapbox is hard to attain...[Jörgen Sigvardsson] I wish I could remember what it was like to only have a short term memory.[David Kentley]
Chris Meech wrote:
Where did it say that VS6 would no longer build on Vista?
I don't know wheter or not VS6 will run and build on Vista, but if he says VS2002 and VS2003 isn't supported and he doesn't even mention VS6 I assume they don't even care about. But I don't want to start rumors here. For me personally VS6 + VS2005 would be fine. I also find it interesting that he mentions .NET 1.1 and 2.0 but not 1.0, so I assume that 1.0 applications won't run, or at least they don't care.
-
"Pending feedback from you on this beta, our plan is to ship the final version in the next 3-4 months." "Visual Studio 2005 SP1 will run on Vista but will likely have a few compatibility issues. We are working with the Vista team to understand those, to provide workarounds where possible and also work on providing you with a set of fixes beyond SP1." "However, we will not support Visual Studio .NET 2002 or Visual Studio .NET 2003 as development environments on Windows Vista." http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/09/26/772250.aspx[^]
It's freak'in scary when Microsoft's products won't run on Microsoft's OS, that makes me wonder how the hell it is we're all supposed to get our stuff running on the OS without "issues" ... What a comforting feeling ... :~
:..::. Douglas H. Troy ::..
Bad Astronomy |VCF|wxWidgets|WTL -
"Pending feedback from you on this beta, our plan is to ship the final version in the next 3-4 months." "Visual Studio 2005 SP1 will run on Vista but will likely have a few compatibility issues. We are working with the Vista team to understand those, to provide workarounds where possible and also work on providing you with a set of fixes beyond SP1." "However, we will not support Visual Studio .NET 2002 or Visual Studio .NET 2003 as development environments on Windows Vista." http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/09/26/772250.aspx[^]
Dollars to donuts VS6 will work - I bet if you're writing native C++ that targets the raw Win32 API's you're kosher. It's just the .Net folks who are getting screwed. Bummer for those folks, but a good thing I still use VS6 :)
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Techno Silliness
-
It's really starting to look like the inmates are in fact running the asylum.
Umm, I think this has been going on at least since .Net. Witness the Passport fiasco, total rewiting of Longhorn, *major* dropped Longhorn/Vista features (i.e. WinFS), and so forth. This is just the final, public culmination of a mess that has probably been brewing for at least the last 5 years, and probably dates back even earlier.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Techno Silliness
-
Dollars to donuts VS6 will work - I bet if you're writing native C++ that targets the raw Win32 API's you're kosher. It's just the .Net folks who are getting screwed. Bummer for those folks, but a good thing I still use VS6 :)
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Techno Silliness
Actually if scroll down here http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbrun/vistasupport.aspx[^] you will find that the mfc42.dll and the old C runtime ships with Vista, while mfc70, mfc71 and mfc80 (as well as newer CRTs) don't. So someone might come to the conclusion that parts of Vista are build with VS6, but not with VS2003, VS2003 or VS2005.
-
Actually if scroll down here http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbrun/vistasupport.aspx[^] you will find that the mfc42.dll and the old C runtime ships with Vista, while mfc70, mfc71 and mfc80 (as well as newer CRTs) don't. So someone might come to the conclusion that parts of Vista are build with VS6, but not with VS2003, VS2003 or VS2005.
Well if they support VB6, then it make sense that the old VC++ CRT DLL's are there. Don't know how much use the VB internals make of MFC. Interesting to see that the VC++ C++ runtime (msvcp60.dll) *is* missing.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Techno Silliness
-
Umm, I think this has been going on at least since .Net. Witness the Passport fiasco, total rewiting of Longhorn, *major* dropped Longhorn/Vista features (i.e. WinFS), and so forth. This is just the final, public culmination of a mess that has probably been brewing for at least the last 5 years, and probably dates back even earlier.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Techno Silliness
Jim Crafton wrote:
Umm, I think this has been going on at least since .Net. Witness the Passport fiasco, total rewiting of Longhorn, *major* dropped Longhorn/Vista features (i.e. WinFS), and so forth. This is just the final, public culmination of a mess that has probably been brewing for at least the last 5 years, and probably dates back even earlier.
Think positive. MS cannot be evil any more. They cannot conquer the Internet and turn it into a MS.Net any more. Good for us developers, good for us customers, good for everyone (except MS shareholders).
-
Umm, I think this has been going on at least since .Net. Witness the Passport fiasco, total rewiting of Longhorn, *major* dropped Longhorn/Vista features (i.e. WinFS), and so forth. This is just the final, public culmination of a mess that has probably been brewing for at least the last 5 years, and probably dates back even earlier.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Techno Silliness
If you look at the architecture of WPF the underlying part is unmanaged code (MIL, Media Integration Layer), only at the top is managed code. But Microsoft still says the new desktop is build on WPF, in my eyes just to mislead people to make them believe it is build on .NET. I wonder if the native API will ever be exposed of not, maybe they leave all options open for themselves.
-
Well if they support VB6, then it make sense that the old VC++ CRT DLL's are there. Don't know how much use the VB internals make of MFC. Interesting to see that the VC++ C++ runtime (msvcp60.dll) *is* missing.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! Techno Silliness
Jim Crafton wrote:
Well if they support VB6, then it make sense that the old VC++ CRT DLL's are there. Don't know how much use the VB internals make of MFC.
Dependency Walker says VB6.EXE does not use the MFC.
-
"Pending feedback from you on this beta, our plan is to ship the final version in the next 3-4 months." "Visual Studio 2005 SP1 will run on Vista but will likely have a few compatibility issues. We are working with the Vista team to understand those, to provide workarounds where possible and also work on providing you with a set of fixes beyond SP1." "However, we will not support Visual Studio .NET 2002 or Visual Studio .NET 2003 as development environments on Windows Vista." http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/09/26/772250.aspx[^]
ABuenger wrote:
"Visual Studio 2005 SP1 will run on Vista but will likely have a few compatibility issues. We are working with the Vista team to understand those, to provide workarounds where possible and also work on providing you with a set of fixes beyond SP1."
:wtf: Vista's probably been under development for several years now, and VS is a decade old product, both from Microsoft. To even think that they are thinking of mutual compatibility at such a late stage in their release cycle is unbelievable. And to me, it doesn't look like VS's fault here. It's Vista not being backward compatible with older apps. If VS which is from MS has compatibility issues with Vista, I hate to think of other 3rd party apps. Vista most definitely seems unready for release :sigh:
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog -
Chris Meech wrote:
Where did it say that VS6 would no longer build on Vista?
I don't know wheter or not VS6 will run and build on Vista, but if he says VS2002 and VS2003 isn't supported and he doesn't even mention VS6 I assume they don't even care about. But I don't want to start rumors here. For me personally VS6 + VS2005 would be fine. I also find it interesting that he mentions .NET 1.1 and 2.0 but not 1.0, so I assume that 1.0 applications won't run, or at least they don't care.
For 'supported' read 'we won't take support calls'. It does not mean that VS will not run. It will. It does in RC1. I think this is a shockingly bad decision, as is the one to drop SQL Server 2000 support if running on Vista, since these products are still actually in mainstream support. However, again, the software actually does work at this stage.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
-
ABuenger wrote:
"Visual Studio 2005 SP1 will run on Vista but will likely have a few compatibility issues. We are working with the Vista team to understand those, to provide workarounds where possible and also work on providing you with a set of fixes beyond SP1."
:wtf: Vista's probably been under development for several years now, and VS is a decade old product, both from Microsoft. To even think that they are thinking of mutual compatibility at such a late stage in their release cycle is unbelievable. And to me, it doesn't look like VS's fault here. It's Vista not being backward compatible with older apps. If VS which is from MS has compatibility issues with Vista, I hate to think of other 3rd party apps. Vista most definitely seems unready for release :sigh:
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blogIt all works (well, seems to)! They're just saying they're not going to take support calls or any proactive measures to fix issues, which is frickin' ridiculous. Likewise for SQL Server 2000. I mean, if they want Vista to fail, a surefire way is to tell developers that their tools won't work. Consequence: the developers don't upgrade to Vista, don't have experience with it, don't write apps which take advantage of Vista's new features, so users have no reason to upgrade.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
-
"Pending feedback from you on this beta, our plan is to ship the final version in the next 3-4 months." "Visual Studio 2005 SP1 will run on Vista but will likely have a few compatibility issues. We are working with the Vista team to understand those, to provide workarounds where possible and also work on providing you with a set of fixes beyond SP1." "However, we will not support Visual Studio .NET 2002 or Visual Studio .NET 2003 as development environments on Windows Vista." http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2006/09/26/772250.aspx[^]
-
For 'supported' read 'we won't take support calls'. It does not mean that VS will not run. It will. It does in RC1. I think this is a shockingly bad decision, as is the one to drop SQL Server 2000 support if running on Vista, since these products are still actually in mainstream support. However, again, the software actually does work at this stage.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
Mike Dimmick wrote:
For 'supported' read 'we won't take support calls'. It does not mean that VS will not run. It will.
If VS2005 has issues under Vista, do you really believe that VS2002 and VS2003 will run just fine?
-
Actually if scroll down here http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbrun/vistasupport.aspx[^] you will find that the mfc42.dll and the old C runtime ships with Vista, while mfc70, mfc71 and mfc80 (as well as newer CRTs) don't. So someone might come to the conclusion that parts of Vista are build with VS6, but not with VS2003, VS2003 or VS2005.
That would be Wordpad. It's not really updated much from Windows XP (though it does call SetProcessDPIAware). There probably are others, but I believe it was their use in Wordpad and in Microsoft Management Console that caused them to be added to Windows File Protection in Windows 2000.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
-
If you look at the architecture of WPF the underlying part is unmanaged code (MIL, Media Integration Layer), only at the top is managed code. But Microsoft still says the new desktop is build on WPF, in my eyes just to mislead people to make them believe it is build on .NET. I wonder if the native API will ever be exposed of not, maybe they leave all options open for themselves.
The impression I get is that it will all be exposed to unmanaged access but I'm willing to bet that: 1. Tool support will be superior for managed applications. 2. Development will be a lot easier for managed applications.
Kevin
-
ABuenger wrote:
Visual Studio 2005 SP1 will run on Vista but will likely have a few compatibility issues.
That's an oxymoron. It's compatible but it may have issues... I guess it's not that freakin' compatible then, is it?
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001I don't see what's oxymoronic about it.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
It's compatible but it may have issues...
No, he said it will run but may have [compatibility] issues. VS 2005 runs on XP but has issues, i.e., it's buggy.
Kevin
-
It's freak'in scary when Microsoft's products won't run on Microsoft's OS, that makes me wonder how the hell it is we're all supposed to get our stuff running on the OS without "issues" ... What a comforting feeling ... :~
:..::. Douglas H. Troy ::..
Bad Astronomy |VCF|wxWidgets|WTLDouglas Troy wrote:
It's freak'in scary when Microsoft's products won't run on Microsoft's OS
It's happened quite a few times in the past, especially in pre-release stuff.
Kevin
-
It all works (well, seems to)! They're just saying they're not going to take support calls or any proactive measures to fix issues, which is frickin' ridiculous. Likewise for SQL Server 2000. I mean, if they want Vista to fail, a surefire way is to tell developers that their tools won't work. Consequence: the developers don't upgrade to Vista, don't have experience with it, don't write apps which take advantage of Vista's new features, so users have no reason to upgrade.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
Mike Dimmick wrote:
It all works (well, seems to)! They're just saying they're not going to take support calls or any proactive measures to fix issues, which is frickin' ridiculous.
A reasonable attitude would be for MS to apply their support cycle policy for applications through any new OS versions. This is usaully about 10 years for full exhaustion. So, for example they should keep applying VS 2003 patches through 2013 (if that's the cycle for VS 2003? Perhaps it isn't?)
Kevin
